the man and the mandate. let's play "hardball." good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington. let me start with this. the re-elected president did it today, he said what he's going to do, how he's going to lead. he's going to do it like a world leader entering into negotiations with preconditions. those preconditions are now clear. a take back the bush tax cuts from the very top. this is it. what we were waiting for, a tough, sharp statement of what this re-election means.

it means that people will know we have a president who is ready to stand his ground for jobs, for growth, but not the bush/romney way, no more trickle down now that the people of this country have sent their message from the ground up. armed for combat, barack obama takes the field against the very forces who fought to cut him down. he will be a democratic president. he will be fair on taxes. he will use those taxes to rebuild this country and educate it up to the tough competition we face in the 21st century. he's backed by a majority of the american people, indeed re-elected as the only democrat since civil war with two majority elections behind him with an undergraded mandate at his back. today he marched onto the field of combat against an uncertain foe. some ready to deal, others hiding in their bunkers waiting for something, anything, to save

them from the terrifying sight of 21st century electoral reality. i'm joined by dee dee myers, former clinton white house press secretary, and david corn, the author of the ebook, "47 percent." today the president stressed he's willing to compromise to avoid the consequence of going over that so-called fiscal cliff at the end of the year. however, he said he's sticking to his guns, that the wealthiest need to be asked to pay a bit more. let's watch. >> i want to be clear, i'm not wedded to every detail of my plan. i'm open to compromise. i'm open to new ideas. i'm committed to solving our fiscal challenges, but i refuse to accept any approach that isn't balanced. i am not going to ask students and seniors and middle class families to pay down the entire deficit while people like me making over $250,000 aren't asked to pay a dime more in taxes. this was a central question during the election. it was debated over and over again, and on tuesday night we found out that the majority of americans agree with my approach. >> couldn't be more direct than that. i like the clarity today. he said i'll negotiate but not

on this. david corn? >> two years ago when he cut that deal with the congressional republicans to extend the bush tax cuts in return for basically a second stimulus, i thought it was a good deal at the time, he said exactly this. last time i'm going to do this. you took hostages, i'm paying ransom now because i'm getting more return actually, but down the road it's not going to be -- >> he also said this is what the election was about. >> and it was if you look at the exit polls, you look at the numbers. mandate is a big word you used at the top of the show, but he won, and at some point he has shown he's been willing to compromise on democratic policies much more than the republicans. he will give on entitlements, but he has to get something in return. >> dee dee, tell me what you heard today. he said that election meant something, it meant fairness. >> that was probably the single most repeated phrase of the

election campaign, talking about the middle class. they truly believe they won because the message was protecting the middle class and they beat romney. >> and he called for lower tax rates which didn't win the day. >> but i think the other part of that that was really important was he said i'm not wedded to any detail, i'm open to new ideas and compromise. that's really important because both sides are going to have to give up things they really care about. >> i heard a totally different speech from the president, as we all did, from what romney would have said if he won. and he could have won. a couple weeks ago it looked like he was heading that direction. he said he wanted the tax run from the rich because he wanted to do things, not just to screw them, but to do stuff. he actually came out today and said, i want to build stuff in this country, rebuild the highways. look at new york, the places that need rebuilding.

look at the education needs. we have to catch up to the chinese in education, catch up to the rest of the world. >> i think the election we just had was one of the most ideological elections in modern times. >> explain it in simple terms. >> the president put forward a vision, i look at government as a way to come together communally through taxes to invest in infrastructure and innovation and education to move the country forward. the romney/ryan view, which is very simply stated, people believe that government is the enemy. you got to get government out of the way and let the markets work and that's how you move ahead. it was very clear cut, and one guy won and one lost. >> we're in this together. i'm beginning to like his speech. i was really tired there. i'm beginning to like it because i'm beginning to hear in it a lot of thought, a lot of thought. >> there's no question that he has -- i think david is right,

this was a very ideological election, but the problem -- the challenge is still that half the country didn't vote for him, right? half -- and they sent a republican congress -- or republican house back to congress, and so that's just the reality. now, everybody agrees we have to do something about the fiscal cliff. the question becomes now that you agree you have to do something, who gets saved. the president made clear investments in creating jobs and infrastructure and education and technology are not negotiable. >> the house -- all revenue measures have to originate in the house. john boehner talked about the looming fiscal cliff, and like the president he also hinted at room for compromise. you have to listen carefully to see the compromise that could be coming. >> it's clear that there are a lot of special interest loopholes in the tax code, both corporate and personal. it's also clear that there are all kinds of deductions, some of which make sense. others don't. everything, everything on the revenue side and on the spending side has to be looked at. >> senator chuck schumer in new york this morning on msnbc suggested that the right wing might be more willing to accept compromise now. he's being hopeful. let's watch. >> boehner wants to compromise. that's why he gave that speech. you know, boehner is not a hard right guy. he's a mainstream conservative, and i think it's going to work because the hard right is chastened in a lot of ways.

>> here is a republican who may not be quite in on what happens -- happening after the election, jeff duncan. when i look at the results of the election, congressman duncan says, it becomes clear the house is the last line of defense for preserving freedom in this country. the people of south carolina rejected president obama's policies, and i intend to fight on their behalf. in other words, it's the civil war. i'm standing up for south carolina and obama may be interested in this thing called the union. i'm for south carolina. what an amazing -- loyalty to your state as opposed to your country. didn't we get past that? >> i don't think so. and this is the issue -- >> i'm standing up for south carolina. what does that mean? >> we went through this last summer, two summers ago, with the showdown over the debt ceiling. >> yeah. >> and at that point in time the president tried to reach a grand bargain. schumer is right, john boehner would have cut a deal, but he

couldn't because at the end of the day had he done so, his own house republicans would have risen up in mutiny and he would have lost the speakership. the question now is whether he has some points of leverage against the tea party wing and whether mitch mcconnell and some of the more adult members of the republicans in the senate can put pressure on the house. if they can't change those fundamental dynamics, we're heading in the same direction. >> i think mitch mcconnell is a problem because he's up for re-election and he's worried about getting a challenge from the tea party right. mr. boehner said this is your moment, mr. president, now lead. that's an acknowledgment of reality and a bit of a trying to pass the buck, but it's the truth. it is going to be up to the president to go into those negotiations and to lead and to continue to listen and find areas where compromise can be built. >> but he has to lead -- >> let me help you out. >> he has to lead publicly as

well because the election -- >> sell. >> he has to sell it. there aren't a lot of republicans i think at play from -- in regards to public pressure, but there are a few, and the president is going to have to work hard to find points of pressure on those people -- >> let's try -- >> they have to be willing to absorb some blows. >> remember how he ran against hillary clinton and beat her. hillary clinton had a great idea, the individual mandate for health care, self reliance -- >> actually a republican idea. >> so the president bought into an idea he had ran against. now this time everybody on the democrat side, the progressive side, said you can't go this romney direction, keep the lower rates but get rid of this -- some big fat deductions. now the president is being given an opening by boehner saying there is a way we can compromise. keep that 35% for the top rate, but take away all the fat cat deductions. there may not be enough money there. people in that institute -- >> the tax policy center. >> is there enough opportunity for that kind of direction, take away a lot of deductions for state and local, for example,

taxation which you have to pay anyway. you can have your formal 35%, but you're going to pay a lot more taxes. >> i think at the end of the day, right now the white house is going to stand by, we want the top rate to go back to 39.6%. that's their opening position. we want it to start with people at 250 and above. they're going to stand by that now. going into negotiations the principle they need to protect is the wealthiest pay more. americans don't care exactly how you get there, whether it's through the tax -- >> so there is an opening here. >> there's no question there's an opening here. >> but it's the president pushing this and the other guy, boehner, saying i have to root for you here. >> yeah. >> the president is willing to deal, he's willing to compromise. maybe even more so than some democrats would like. but he's also able to get the votes and bring the votes to the table. all those things are open questions on the republican side. can john boehner match him in any of those departments? >> -- he said i'm open to new revenue. he didn't say whatever -- eliminating deductions -- it's not. you have to give boehner credit.

he said new revenue. >> the president goes to sleep tonight he's thinking, i won. must be a tremendous relief on his part. then he's thinking down the road, because he is thinking of the future, he's going, wait a minute, i got two big risks. one, i can't defend my philosophy which my base will hate and i will hate myself for it. michelle will hate me for it. and we need more money to do more things. the other fear is i'm going off the fiscal cliff, meaning i tried so hard to get my way that we screwed it up with the republicans like we did last august and nothing gets done and the economy tanks again for a second recession, and i'm going down in history as a double failure. >> he can't let that happen. >> at some point he has to pull back from the paul krugmans of the world and the people on the far left, not far left but left, and say i'm president, you're a columnist. >> right. he has -- he's going to get a lot of flack from both his own left flank and the right.

he has to accept that. he cannot as a responsible adult let the economy go -- let us go over the fiscal cliff. that would be terrible for the country and for the people he's trying to protect in this. it would be terrible for the middle class. >> at the same time though the way he negotiates and the way he tries to reach that compromise is going to be essential. i think people in the democratic party will be willing to yield on some issues. they'll fight and scream and make good cases for their own position, but at the end of the day if the compromise is reasonable and is good and he's gotten major concessions from the right, then i think -- >> i got the solution. if it comes down to the republican party led by john boehner brings this country to economic hell to protect the very rich, they're gone. so that's what he has to do is put them in the box. the only thing separating this country from economic deliverance to a better time is a bunch of republican toadies and hacks. >> he has to set the narrative -- >> let jack lew and the rest of them figure how to carve this so

the republican's only escape is to say we're here for -- >> if he gets this right, that sets him up for success in a second term. >> i'm not here to reduce the debt, i'm here to get more jobs and growth. thank you, david corn and dee dee myers. coming up, why romney lost. this is a good one. david frum, former reagan speechwriter, says mitt romney's problem wasn't just shifting demographics or a fumbling campaign, it was his message. the message of cut benefits for the poor, the elderly, and the middle class to pay for tax cuts for the rich. until that message changes, the republicans will not be a majority party, he says. also mitt romney wasn't this week's biggest loser. how about karl rove? i'll say it again, karl rove. not only did he spend millions of other people's money with little gain, his tv performance tuesday night made him the poster child for the republican party's refusal to be part of reality people. plus, inside the two campaigns, how the obama

campaign reacted to that disastrous first debate and why as late as tuesday night the romney people thought they had this thing won. we've got reporters from both sides, a lot of tick tock and narrative tonight. and the shocker of the day, cia chief david petraeus resigns he says because of an extramarital affair. we'll try to get to the bottom of that water cooler story tonight. this is "hardball," the place for politics.

welcome back to "hardball." with the republican soul searching well under way and the democratic gains in the senate and in the house, the republicans are facing the reality of a country moving further and further away from the right wing ideology that energizes its base. if the republican party wants to survive, then the party that questions evolution is going to have to evolve and quickly. but will they or will they double down on the far right message pushed by many in the party and just blame romney, the guy, for losing because he was a flawed candidate? steve latourette is a republican congressman from ohio east of cleveland, and david frum is a former speechwriter for george w. bush. he's the author of a new ebook called "why romney lost." that was a quick one to come out with, david. that's journalism. that's one day wonder stuff.

let me start with the elected official. steve latourette, what do you make of it? i'm sure david would do it, and i would do it, too. you always come out of these diagnosis postmortems by basically having an opportunity to express your philosophy you had going in with it and say this proves me right. did this election seem to be going in the wrong direction long before tuesday night as far as you were looking at it? did you know there was a problem? >> i knew there was a problem in what the president's campaign did beautifully in the month of august. as he said, 42 states really don't matter, and we will concentrate in eight states, ohio being one of them, and we're going to define mitt romney before he has the chance to show up in denver on october 3rd and sort of define himself. and so for the state like ohio, there wasn't enough time between october the 3rd for the real mitt romney to get to the socially moderate, fiscally conservative women because they'd already been convinced

this was an evil guy from bain capital. the president's campaign was brilliant, and mitt romney ran out of time. >> didn't he commit a lot of personal attacks, the $10,000 bet, the spanish people self-deporting. you let him off the hook, but he seemed like he gave a lot of clues to who he might well be. >> well, but i'll tell you, those were -- we all say things that are unfortunate from time to time, but i happen to believe the guy that showed up in denver was the real mitt romney, and the problem was that during that campaign season when he has to debate michele bachmann and rick perry and herman cain, he had to move so far to the right in order to get -- >> why didn't he go to the left? >> why didn't he go to the left? because he wouldn't have won the nomination. >> that's my point. your party is on the far right because that's where the votes are in the primaries. >> well -- >> isn't that the problem? >> well, i would argue that the same is true in the democratic party. the votes in primaries are on

the far left, and that's why you see democratic candidates having to veer to the left and then they come back to the center. mitt romney got there too late. >> i can't argue with that. first, i want david to look at this. look at this conservative blogger. he wrote arguing it was wrong to blame the social conservatives for alienating moderates. you may mentally decide to escape having to deal with the other implications of the election that if only the gop would abandon its social conservatism it would do better. but if you do, go find yourself a new coalition because you want to have half the votes the gop has now. there's a person who has found a way to rationalize the defeat from their point of view which is go right on social conservatism. >> the floggings will continue until morale improves, and the party will continue to shrink until it begins to grow. to your question at the very beginning, i actually started work on this book six weeks ago and it was not -- it's not a product of one day. it's a product of a lot of thought -- >> when did you see the problem emerge then? >> well, let's just start with this fact.

in the past six elections, the republican party has won a majority of the votes in the presidency just one time, 2004. six elections, five of six, less than half the vote. in the previous six presidential elections going back to 1968, republicans won five times out of six, even if you include their defeats, they averaged 52.5% of the vote. one six-cycle period, 52.5%, and the other never a majority. this is not about mitt romney. it's not about chris christie it's not about the storm. it's about a deep obsolescence of what the party was doing. the core problem is this. like all successful institutions, general motors after the 1960s, the u.s. army after world war ii, the republican party has been slow to change to a new reality because what it used to do used to work so well, and it's so difficult to admit it doesn't work anymore and hasn't been working for a long time. >> is it just because there aren't -- the percentage of white people in the population is diminishing? >> no, it is not about that.

it's not about the latino vote only. it's about the american middle class. it's that the republican party developed in the 1970s a series of very powerful answers to the problems of low productivity and high inflation and the soviet challenge, and now in the 21st century all of those problems have been solved, and we have new problems of inequality, high health care cost, and the chinese challenge, they are offering still the same ideas that worked against completely different problems. it's like giving antibiotics to somebody who is suffering from mental depression. >> i was watching this whole thing that's going to go on, congressman, congratulations on getting re-elected. hannity has one view, which is get with this immigration situation and give them a path, and then limbaugh says are we going to become a lefty and hand out condoms? he's such a ridiculous person in this regard. your view of the party, is there one thing they could do that would make your party more

acceptable to the middle? >> absolutely. and that is we can't abandon the entire new england states and say we're not going to elect republicans and the way you do that is our message on finances is sound. it's when we get a guy in indiana and a guy in missouri saying being pregnant after a rape is a gift from god, well, that scares some people, and some people in my party need to figure that out. >> okay. well said. thank you very much, david frum, good luck with the ebook, and, congressman, good to meet you on this show. up next, david petraeus today resigned over what he described as an extramarital affair. we'll get the latest when we return. this is "hardball," the place for politics. at some point in the many lives of a dollar

it will be a dollar saved by somebody who switched to esurance. like, dollar karma. being online, esurance saves dollars that come back as more dollars for you. esurance. now backed by allstate. click or call. welcome back to "hardball." big news here in washington late today. cia director david petraeus has resigned his position over what he called an extramarital affair. nbc chief foreign affairs -- chief correspondent for foreign

matters richard engel is with us along with david ignatius of the "washington post." let me go with you, richard, what do you make of this? it didn't seem -- what's the right word? it didn't seem to be freighted right. he's quitting over an extramarital affair, but why is he telling us about this? it doesn't seem like the normal washington scandal developing here. what's going on? >> well, the timing, we may have some new indications about the timing based on the information i'm about to say. this is what we know so far and what we've been able to confirm and is reportable. of course, the cia director today resigned, and he cited that extramarital affair. also we have learned from law enforcement sources and law enforcement officials that the fbi is now investigating, and this is an ongoing investigation, into paula broadwell. she is someone who has had close access to general petraeus. she was his biographer and wrote a book on general petraeus called "all in." she's spent extensive time with

him in afghanistan, has made numerous television appearances talking about general petraeus. says she's gone running with him. the fbi investigation is seeing whether she had improper access to the general -- to general petraeus' e-mails and may have had access to his -- may have accidentally or deliberately had access to classified information, and so we know this investigation is taking place and that it's identified paula broadwell, someone who has been close to david petraeus, which many people are saying could be an indication of the timing of all of this. >> okay. david ignatius, you're excellent at covering all this spy agencies. what's going on? >> well, i think richard mentioned the fbi investigation of paula broadwell. paula broadwell is general petraeus' biographer and somebody who has been close to him. to speak for a moment about the cia, general petraeus when he came to the cia about 15 months ago appointed as his deputy the then acting director michael morell, who is a career agency

analyst. michael morell has stepped in as acting director again. i think that's, from the standpoint of the cia and the stability of u.s. intelligence efforts, the most positive thing you could say. morell is a career guy. he's trusted by the white house. he was trusted by petraeus, and so you have a smoother transition than you sometimes do in these situations. >> let me get back to richard engel about this. you know, you know these guys. you know as a military guy covering our fights overseas, the combat operations in iraq especially, this man was almost at the general mcarthur level just a few years ago. people were talking about him being the republican candidate for the presidency in the current election cycle. this is a big fall. this is a big fall down from where he was in our national estimate. >> it's almost the fall of an american hero. this last decade didn't create very many heros in the public imagination. there were many heroes who were recognized by their brothers in

arms, but i think there's only been really two so far, and both of them have been brought down in scandal. one, general petraeus today, and the other general mcchrystal who was fired unceremoniously after that article in "rolling stone." they were the two names that americans could recognize. general mcchrystal for his role in black ops and general petraeus who could perhaps walk into a football stadium and get a standing ovation. >> what a difference a day made. thank you, david and richard. thank you so much, gentlemen. up next, karl rove is peddling a new line about why president obama won re-election. rove claims the president's campaign, loved the way he stole this phrase, suppressed the vote to win. when is this guy going to deal with reality and stop talking. suppress the vote? i think that was their number.

when is this guy going to deal with reality and stop talking. suppress the vote? i think that was their number. you're watching "hardball," the place for politics.

here's what's happening. the supreme court says it will review the challenge to the voting rights act. the appeal from shelby county, alabama, says significant progress has been made and the federal oversight is no longer needed. back to "hardball."

the people who gave him the money, i think it was the koch brothers, they gave him $400 million and said, tubby, go get us a president. we got stuff we want to ramrod through. we want to turn this america -- we want america back. here, what's it going to take to get america back, karl? $400 billion, bring back a real america, will you? so a lot of that money is leftover. i tell you, the koch brothers, don't be surprised if you read karl rove was beaten up by the koch brothers. >> welcome back to "hardball." of all the postmortems on the election, the complete flop of karl rove and his super pac is the most incredible. now that he's come to grips with the fact president obama did win election again, he has a new theory of why it happened.

this is rove's theory on why president obama was re-elected. let's listen. >> now with the state of ohio -- >> by suppressing the vote. by making -- by saying to people, you may not like who i am and you know you can't bring yourself to vote for me, i'm going to paint this other guy as simply a rich guy who only cares about himself. >> you know what? you know, reminds me of a criminal trial when the guy is caught red-handed stealing the car, joe told me to take it. complete nonsense. karl rove set up the spin. fox host megan kelly tried to bring him back to reality. she's been pretty good dealing with this guy. let's listen. >> president obama has been re-elected with the -- becoming the first president in history to win a second term with a smaller percentage of the vote than he did -- >> you keep saying that, but he won. and that's what the republicans care about, the democrats care about. >> you know what? it's like sober up. karl rove, get your head together. michael steele, who was chair of the republican national

committee and i have to say a better one than reince priebus, he's an msnbc political analyst, and willie brown was mayor of san francisco. i have to say one thing about california, mayor, you know, i thought this race -- i'm going to say -- it was like the west greenwich village got the vote for everything. same-sex marriage, marijuana, raise taxes to pay for education. this is the most liberal electorate i have seen out there since lbj's day. your thoughts quickly on what happened tuesday. >> well, i think that what happened tuesday is the republican party literally gave it away. they have been obviously succumbing to whatever was required from the tea party for so long that they have gotten out of step with who the people are, what the people care about, and why the people would be motivated to vote. they didn't do a job of selling the republican party with anything anybody could support. >> okay. what's the suppression thing? we all know usually historically suppression means usually

directed at the minority vote. we will make it difficult for you to vote. we will -- what do we call it? i can't remember the old terms. you had to pay to vote. >> pay to vote. >> poll tax. and what they call literacy test, some question in greek. some incredibly complicated thing. all to screw the black voter. now he's using it in what context? translate what he's talking about. >> i don't know. i think megan was obviously a little bit incredulous, too. >> i think she's a lawyer. >> -- suppress the vote, you have to keep in mind the president got eight million votes less than the last time. did he suppress his own vote? it doesn't make a lot of sense. there's a lot of grasping at straws in the face of what was a real, you know, smackdown by the obama team on tuesday night. and i think that instead of trying to analyze this thing so you feel better about what happened, you understand and appreciate that the country has changed. you got your clock cleaned because you were out of step with where the country is, and

now you need to regroup and refocus on a message, as we did in 2010 and in 2009 to elect chris christie out in new jersey and a bob mcdonald in virginia, a state we lost again, how we go forward, and i think the mayor is exactly right. laying out a comprehensive, cogent message about our economy, our future, and our families, and not get into the weeds on things that people aren't focused on. >> it seems, mr. mayor, that the republicans built their whole strategy this time about what worked in 2010. a small electorate, more white electorate, older electorate, the kinds of people who vote dutifully all the time, and then they faced a democratic party which was armed with a larger electorate of people who voted this time more for the president, younger people, minorities, women winning with 53%. it seems like their whole model was based on a very low turnout of voters. >> that is exactly how, in fact, they lost. but let me also tell you, chris, you have got to look at how the

obama team, which clearly was a superior operation when it comes to politics, they took the model that's been used in cities all around the country, and that is go to people who have not voted before. go to people who are not campaigned to before and see if you can't convince them to become a party of the body politic. they're never going to be polled by anybody. if you can put them, you will have a hidden treasure of people who want to vote. and that's what happened this time. and the republicans suppressing the vote. that business that you described about the poll tax and all the other kinds of means by which you suppress poll, that happened in 40 or 50 states, and it was all republicans and republican control. that made democrats really angry, and in particular it made african-american democrats in cleveland and in cincinnati and in columbus and in akron and toledo really mad, and that anger caused them to stand in line for hours to be able to cast their vote. >> mr. mayor, i heard it said

with a little fine tuning, not only did it make them angry, they weren't that hot on the president to begin with. they liked him. they wouldn't feverishly vote for him until they saw they were being kept out for voting. talk about it. you are a republican, michael. tell me about this. i heard exactly what the mayor said. the strategy was go out and find people that haven't been talked to, puerto ricans, get them activated. skip the guy with the gun and go with the person you think is going to be a democrat. get them activated, bring them into the system, and get them to vote. that's a positive, aggressive system. >> actually, you set the question up, and i just want to clarify the record. what you described we did in reverse. we actually did that. that's how we were so successful in 2010. that's how we expanded the base and the reach of the party. >> how did you do it? >> we built a network of coalitions around the country. we were -- >> you were with the evangelicals and the gun people -- >> we got everybody under the

same tent for the first time in a long time. we came out in 2006 and 2008 -- >> did you see the demographic problem coming? >> i have been seeing it since the year 2000. the shift in maryland and our state, watching charles county and st. mary's county in the southern part become more minority in majority and so -- >> because they brought so many people in for agriculture and other -- >> it's what the mayor and you are talking about only in reverse. we need to go back out -- >> you guys together know a lot. thank you, mr. mayor. i am impressed by california. once again either showing the way or doing something completely new like voting to raise taxes for any reason, even education, and they did it. you guys -- i never thought jerry could do it again. >> they're amazing out there. >> thank you, mr. mayor. thank you, michael steele. you handled this all right, didn't you? >> it was pretty good. >> you voted for the other guy, right? >> no. i voted for mitt romney. thank you very much. >> i thought you might. up next, inside -- it's going to be great.

junkies stay with us. we have the greatest inside stories coming up from our embeds of what actually happened to romney the last couple months, what happened to the obama camp, inside. i wish we had two hours for this. we have a few minutes. the fact the romney people thought they had won up through tuesday evening. how it all went to the end. great stuff coming up. that's ahead. this is "hardball," the place for politics.

we're coming back with the

inside story of both campaigns in the final days before the election this week. i cannot wait to hear it myself. back after this.

we're back. years of planning, months of rallies, and days of waiting came to an end tuesday when polls closed nationwide and results started pouring. in while both felt confidence in their victory, in the end mitt romney was only able to nab one swing, north carolina, away from the president. no one can tell the story better than the men and women who lived the life of 2012 on the campaign trail itself. we have two of these reporters with me tonight. matt visor and ashley park of

"the new york times." give me what we call the tick tock. tell me the mood tuesday night. it seemed there were some amazing time between when we called it here at msnbc a little after 11:00 and when the loser came out and talked, romney. >> it went from extreme confidence to extreme shell shocked at the very end when he came out to speak. in between, there was this weird moment of what's going to happen. all the aids have been told to show up with packed bags ready to go in case there was a recount. there was a call that said there was going to be a recount in virginia or ohio. bring your bags outside of the garden. we're taking them to the airport and you'll be on the first flights out to virginia and ohio. and obviously, that was called off. >> then there was a point where the presidential candidate himself governor romney came outside and said it's gone? >> i mean, so he was not watching tv actually. he was in a room with his family, his five sons and getting updates from his

campaign manager and things were not looking good, but they were waiting to see what could they do, what were the options. finally he just realized, he hadn't even written a concession speech. it was time for him to write that speech and it was over. >> let's talk about the obama campaign and ohio state. what happened out there? >> i went to ohio state on halloween night. it was a night when college students should be doing anything else but voting. but the obama campaign had these buss and they were bussing people out in franklin county to go vote early. it was a lively scene. loud music. after they voted the obama campaign had people walking down each row and gathering data on each student who had voted and asking their names if they could volunteer on election day and gathering information. so the next morning, i sat down with the romney campaign. people on the ground in ohio, and asked them are you doing anything similar or anything to replicate that. they said the juice on that is not worth the squeeze.

>> i was skeptical because i kept seeing the president going to college campus. s. i thought he ought to be back in the oval office. but getting out the vote and the stirring them up. >> you had also a new group of college students who were not the college students that were excited four years ago, but they were different college kids. >> 1% increase in their share of the vote. >> let me ask about this. like everybody on the planet, reacted to the first debate thinking the president, who we thought had an iq of 180 and showed he could go to sleep in prime time. what didn't come out of that from the romney side or why did they stay on the line for the next three or four weeks saying i'm a businessman and can create jobs. they went flying off talking about benghazi and all that stuff? >> they actually tried to do that. they saw how good governor romney did in the debate and how well bipartisanship tested when they talked about that. so they cut it out. the romney campaign said when they tried to get him to talk

direct to camera, he didn't come off well. but that debate footage gave him the chance to do that. he was going to iowa, which was where it all started for president obama four years ago and sounding like president obama talking about reaching across the aisle. but there were distractions, not least of which the huge storm that threw them off their game and they couldn't stick to that one message. >> let's talk about romney in pennsylvania. i'm from up there in the philly part. i wonder when he got 30,000 people. i said maybe he knows something we don't know. >> the last few weeks on the romney campaign felt like something was happening. >> but he was going for a bigger majority. >> and the crowds were big. they were more enthusiastic than they had ever been before. >> what were you saying when you saw it in your reporting? >> that we don't know how broad based that is. it turned out that it wasn't as broad based. >> so big crowds where people

like romney in terms of background and it wasn't translating out into the country. >> right. and there was a different feel between romney crowds and obama crowds. obama crowds were nervous. they had a pit in their stomach. they didn't know how it was going to turn out. >> i went up to the thing before the election. hard to believe it was this week. monday night in pennsylvania, there was bill clinton with a crowd of people your age. they were all in their early 20s, packed. 10,000 students. i said i haven't seen this enthusiasm. is that going across the country? >> after the debate, governor romney started getting -- not all of his crowds were huge. but he went to red rock in

denver and it felt like people had come out to see a rock star. you had huge crowds. on tuesday on election day when governor romney touched down in pittsburgh, there was a huge crowd. it wasn't an event. it lined the upper deck of a parking garage overlooking where he landed. they were waiting for him and cheering for him. he was so touched he had found the love he had been searching for. >> what an amazing thing this election has been. thank you. >> when we return, let me finish with the wonder of this election. you're watching "hardball," the place for politics. [ thunder crashes ] [ female announcer ] some people like to pretend a flood could never happen to them. and that their homeowners insurance protects them. [ thunder crashes ] it doesn't. stop pretending.

only flood insurance covers floods. ♪ visit floodsmart.gov/pretend to learn your risk.

let me finish with this. it stunned me too. i couldn't believe what i was watching. so i sympathize with governor romney. i didn't see this sweep coming. same-sex marriage, legalization of marijuana, new taxes to pay for education, is this country america or greenwich village? how liberal as we gotten with? we elected the first african-american president and now giving this president double majority votes. something fdr has gotten going back to the civil war. i'm still stunned. i will wake up this weekend after i hope some long sleep and realize that this is even a better country than i thought it